William Pitt and the Great WarRose, J. Holland (John Holland)
History
William Pitt and the Great War
Rose, J. Holland (John Holland)
Europe -- History -- 1789-1815; Great Britain -- History -- George III, 1760-1820; Pitt, William, 1759-1806
I cannot conclude this dispatch without again urging Your
Excellency to press in the strongest manner possible upon the
Dutch Ministers the necessity of immediately bringing forward
their whole force. It is evident that the present intentions of
France are those of aggression. Whichever of the Allies is first
attacked, there can be no doubt under the present circumstances,
but that they must make common cause in order to render the
calamity of war short, if it is unavoidable. And if the state of
the preparations of the Republic is found inadequate to the
emergency, the attack will certainly be first made there where
least resistance is expected. Every circumstance therefore, of
interest and dignity require [_sic_] that no exertion of which
the Republic can be made capable, should be spared at such a
moment as the present.[159]
Evidently Grenville looked on Chauvelin's note as an ultimatum; and it
is noteworthy that Pitt on 28th December refused to see Chauvelin. Our
Dutch Allies, however, were by no means ready. The separate Admiralties
of the Dutch Provinces had not enough men to equip, still less to man,
their ships; and almost their only defence lay in a British squadron
which set sail for Flushing on or about 29th December.[160]
For the present, then, Pitt and Grenville contented themselves with
sending a stiff rejoinder to Chauvelin's note. Grenville reminded him
that he had no official character in this country since the fall of the
French monarchy, and that the sinister meaning of the decree of 19th
November, as shown in the public reception given at Paris to the
promoters of sedition in this country, was in no wise cleared away by
his recent declaration, which still claimed the right to encourage
disloyalty. With regard to the Scheldt question, Grenville declared
again that it was of the highest importance both in point of fact and of
principle; of fact, because the action of France pre-supposed her
sovereignty of the Low Countries; of principle, because, if passed over,
it would give her the right to abrogate treaties at her will. The desire
of England to preserve strict neutrality in French affairs was
universally acknowledged, and he (Chauvelin) had not urged a single
circumstance in disproof of it. But, England (continued Grenville) "will
never see with indifference that France shall make herself, either
directly or indirectly, sovereign of the Low Countries, or general
arbitress of the rights and liberties of Europe. If France is really
desirous of maintaining friendship and peace with England, she must show
herself disposed to renounce her views of aggression and aggrandisement,
and to confine herself within her own territory, without insulting other
Governments, without disturbing their tranquillity, without violating
their rights."[161]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account